The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 7 of the 69 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings
Open accessAbstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is a field of study that combines the applications of machine learning, algorithm productions, and natural language processing. Applications of AI transform the tools of education. AI has a variety of educational applications, such as personalized learning platforms to promote students' learning, automated assessment systems to aid teachers, and facial recognition systems to generate insights about learners' behaviors. Despite the potential benefits of AI to support students' learning experiences and teachers' practices, the ethical and societal drawbacks of these systems are rarely fully considered in K-12 educational contexts. The ethical challenges of AI in education must be identified and introduced to teachers and students. To address these issues, this paper (1) briefly defines AI through the concepts of machine learning and algorithms; (2) introduces applications of AI in educational settings and benefits of AI systems to support students' learning processes; (3) describes ethical challenges and dilemmas of using AI in education; and (4) addresses the teaching and understanding of AI by providing recommended instructional resources from two providers-i.e., the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT) Media Lab and Code.org. The article aims to help practitioners reap the benefits and navigate ethical challenges of integrating AI in K-12 classrooms, while also introducing instructional resources that teachers can use to advance K-12 students' understanding of AI and ethics.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
28 Sources not found · 19 No full text of the sources · 12 Own interpretation · 5 Partly supported · 3 Not checked yet · 3 No basis given · 2 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“In essence, algorithms reflect the values of their builders who hold positions of power [26].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [26] Hrastinski, S., Olofsson, A.D., Arkenback, C., Ekström, S., Ericsson, E., Fransson, G., Jaldemark, J., Ryberg, T., Öberg, L., Fuentes, A., Gustafsson, U., Humble, N., Mozelius, P., Sundgren, M., Utterberg, M.: Critical imaginaries and reflections on artificial intelligence and robots in postdigital K-12 education. Postdigit. Sci. Educ. 1, 427–445 (2019) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction says business interests might shape the agenda for AI in education, and the Artificial Intelligence in Education section discusses economic interests and demand-driven design. Neither passage says that algorithms reflect their builders’ values or that those builders hold positions of power; searches for those ideas and for “algorithms” found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“These systems generate models of learners using their knowledge and cognition; however, the existing platforms do not yet provide models for learners’ social, emotional, and motivational states [28].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Personalized learning systems
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [28] Herder, E., Sosnovsky, S., Dimitrova, V.: Adaptive intelligent learning environments. In: Duval, Erik, Sharples, Mike, Sutherland, Rosamund (eds.) Technology enhanced learning, pp. 109–114. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper says cognitive state is a main factor in adaptation (Modeling Knowledge, Cognition and Metacognition, p. 4) and that emotion and affect are not yet part of a typical AILE learner model (Beyond Cognition, p. 5). It does not make the same claim about social or motivational states, and its qualifier is “a typical AILE,” not all existing platforms. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Existing research on AI in education provides insight on supporting students’ understanding and use of AI [2, 13]”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Future directions for research and teaching on AI and ethics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites [13] Borenstein, J., Howard, A.: Emerging challenges in AI and the need for AI ethics education. AI Ethics 1, 61–65 (2020) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 5 (page unavailable) offers guidance for teaching students the ethical design of AI and helping them understand its ethical challenges. The paper focuses on AI ethics education for future developers, rather than students’ understanding and use of AI more generally. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Predictive systems which are powered by algorithms jeopardize students and teachers’ autonomy and their ability to govern their own life [46, 47].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [46] Piano, S.L.: Ethical principles in machine learning and artificial intelligence: cases from the field and possible ways forward. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 7(9), 1–7 (2020) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page unavailable) says that ceding functions to algorithms can diminish human control, and “Points of friction between ethical dimensions” discusses retaining human decision-making autonomy. The paper lists education as an application, but these passages do not establish that predictive systems threaten students’ and teachers’ autonomy or their ability to govern their lives. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [47] Regan, P.M., Jesse, J.: Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics Inf. Technol. 21, 167–179 (2019) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
In the paper
“Comparing students’ scores on researcher-developed or standardized tests, research shows that the instruction based on personalized learning systems resulted in higher test scores than traditional teacher-led instruction [36].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Personalized learning systems
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [36] Ladson-Billings, G.: Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. Am. Educ. Res. J. 32(3), 465–491 (1995) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“On the other hand, AI cannot be a substitute for human interaction [22, 47].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [22] Dishon, G.: New data, old tensions: big data, personalized learning, and the challenges of progressive education. Theory Res. Educ. 15(3), 272–289 (2017) source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [47] Regan, P.M., Jesse, J.: Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics Inf. Technol. 21, 167–179 (2019) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ethical challenges and risks posed by AI systems seemingly run counter to marketing efforts that present algorithms to the public as if they are objective and value-neutral tools.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Even though the bias is embedded into the algorithmic model with no explicit intention, we can see various gender and racial biases in different AI-based platforms [54].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [54] Stahl, B.C., Wright, D.: Ethics and privacy in ai and big data: implementing responsible research and innovation. IEEE Secur. Priv. 16(3), 26–33 (2018) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whenever people create algorithms, they also create a set of data that represent society’s historical and systemic biases, which ultimately transform into algorithmic bias.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Automated assessment systems are becoming one of the most prominent and promising applications of machine learning in K-12 education [42].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Automated assessment systems
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Murphy, R. F.: Artificial intelligence applications to support k–12 teachers and teaching: a review of promising applications, challenges, and risks. Perspective. 1–20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.7249/PE315 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 28
- Probably not a substantial claim. 22
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“These algorithms do not occur in a vacuum; rather, they shape and are shaped by ever-evolving cultural, social, institutional and political forces and structures [33, 34].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [33] Johnson, M.: A scalable approach to reducing gender bias in Google translate. https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/04/a-scalable-approach-to-reducing-gender.html Accessed 26 March 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites [34] Ko, A.J., Oleson, A., Ryan, N., Register, Y., Xie, B., Tari, M., Davidson, M., Druga, S., Loksa, D.: It is time for more critical CS education. Commun. ACM 63(11), 31–33 (2020) source
The Abstract says that computing does not occur in a vacuum and both shapes and is shaped by social, cultural, institutional, and political forces. In the same passage, it identifies data and algorithms as part of the systems under discussion, supporting the citing sentence’s paraphrase. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“More specifically, applications of AI can support instruction in mixed-ability classrooms; while personalized learning systems provide students with detailed and timely feedback about their writing products, automated assessment systems support teachers by freeing them from excessive workloads [26, 42].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [26] Hrastinski, S., Olofsson, A.D., Arkenback, C., Ekström, S., Ericsson, E., Fransson, G., Jaldemark, J., Ryberg, T., Öberg, L., Fuentes, A., Gustafsson, U., Humble, N., Mozelius, P., Sundgren, M., Utterberg, M.: Critical imaginaries and reflections on artificial intelligence and robots in postdigital K-12 education. Postdigit. Sci. Educ. 1, 427–445 (2019) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Individualization section reports expectations that AI could help teachers individualize classroom teaching, and the Role of the Teacher section describes possible assistance with assessment and less work. These are prospective views, not demonstrated effects. Neither section supports the specific claim that personalized systems give detailed, timely feedback on students’ writing. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Murphy, R. F.: Artificial intelligence applications to support k–12 teachers and teaching: a review of promising applications, challenges, and risks. Perspective. 1–20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.7249/PE315 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“These AI systems can increase the capacity of K-12 educational systems and support the social and cognitive development of students and teachers [55, 8].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [55] The Institute for Ethical AI in Education. Interim report: towards a shared vision of ethical AI in education. https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-Institute-for-Ethical-AI-in-Educations-Interim-Report-Towards-a-Shared-Vision-of-Ethical-AI-in-Education.pdf. (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Could not verifycites [8] Greenhow, C., Galvin, S., Staudt Willet, K.B.: Inquiring tweets want to know: #Edchat supports for #remoteteaching during COVID-19. British Journal of Educational Technology. 1–21, (2021) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction discusses teachers’ professional learning through social media, and the Discussion describes #Edchat as a source of just-in-time support for remote teaching (page numbers unavailable). Searches for AI systems, artificial intelligence, K–12 educational capacity, and social and cognitive development found no passage addressing the claimed effects of AI systems. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The biggest risks of integrating these algorithms in K-12 contexts are: (a) perpetuating existing systemic bias and discrimination, (b) perpetuating unfairness for students from mostly disadvantaged and marginalized groups, and (c) amplifying racism, sexism, xenophobia, and other forms of injustice and inequity [40].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [40] Miller, F.A., Katz, J.H., Gans, R.: The OD imperative to add inclusion to the algorithms of artificial intelligence. OD Practitioner. 5(1), 6–12 (2018)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“For instance, a text-based chatbot system called “Pounce” was used at Georgia State University to help students through the registration and admission process, as well as financial aid and other administrative tasks [7].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [7] Greenhow, C., Galvin, S., Brandon, D., Askari, E.: A decade of research on K-12 teaching and teacher learning with social media: insights on the state-of-the-field. Teachers College Record 122(6), 1–7 (2020) source
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Considering the shift to remote K-12 education during the COVID-19 pandemic, personalized learning systems offer a promising form of distance learning that could reshape K-12 instruction for the future [35].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Personalized learning systems
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [35] Krueger, N.: Artificial intelligence has infiltrated our lives. Can it improve learning? International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2017).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, applications of AI can positively impact students’ and teachers’ educational experiences and help them address instructional challenges and concerns.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These systems provide insights about students’ behaviors during learning processes and allow teachers to take action or intervene, which, in turn, helps teachers develop learner-centered practices and increase student’s engagement [55].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Facial recognition systems and predictive analytics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [55] The Institute for Ethical AI in Education. Interim report: towards a shared vision of ethical AI in education. https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-Institute-for-Ethical-AI-in-Educations-Interim-Report-Towards-a-Shared-Vision-of-Ethical-AI-in-Education.pdf. (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, these scoring systems have the potential to deal with the complexities of the teaching context and support students’ learning process by providing them with feedback and guidance to improve and revise their writing.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Automated assessment systems
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“On the other hand, a tool called “Gradescope” has been used by over 500 universities to develop and streamline scoring and assessment [12].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Automated assessment systems
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [12] Blumenstyk, G.: Can artificial intelligence make teaching more personal? The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/Can-Artificial-Intelligence/243023 (2018)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Researchers have emphasized the importance of using SNSs (such as Facebook) to expand learning opportunities beyond the classroom, monitor students’ well-being, and deepen student–teacher relations [5].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] Asterhan, C.S.C., Rosenberg, H.: The promise, reality and dilemmas of secondary school teacher–student interactions in Facebook: the teacher perspective. Comput. Educ. 85, 134–148 (2015) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They point out that the integration of social media can foster students’ active learning, collaboration skills, and connections with communities beyond the classroom [6].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Krutka, D., Manca, S., Galvin, S., Greenhow, C., Koehler, M., Askari, E.: Teaching “against” social media: confronting problems of profit in the curriculum. Teachers College Record 121(14), 1–42 (2019) source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Social media are increasingly integrated into K-12 education [7] and subordinate learners’ activities to intelligent algorithm systems [17].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [7] Greenhow, C., Galvin, S., Brandon, D., Askari, E.: A decade of research on K-12 teaching and teacher learning with social media: insights on the state-of-the-field. Teachers College Record 122(6), 1–7 (2020) source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [17] Cheney-Lippold, J.: We are data: algorithms and the making of our digital selves. New York University Press, New York (2017) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although AI can be a time-saving and cognitive aide for teachers, it is but one tool in the teachers’ toolkit.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: Students have a wide range of learning styles and needs.
In the paper
“For instance, AI has a variety of algorithmic applications in education, such as personalized learning systems to promote students’ learning, automated assessment systems to support teachers in evaluating what students know, and facial recognition systems to provide insights about learners’ behaviors [49].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [49] Remian, D.: Augmenting education: ethical considerations for incorporating artificial intelligence in education (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Massachusetts, Boston (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“To create a future generation where an inclusive and diverse citizenry can participate in the development of the future of AI, we need to develop opportunities for K-12 students and teachers to learn about AI via AI- and ethics-based curricula and professional development [2, 58]”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [58] Zimmerman, M.: Teaching AI: exploring new frontiers for learning. International Society for Technology in Education, Portland (2018)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: The ethical and societal drawbacks of AI systems are rarely fully considered in K-12 educational contexts.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Most studies reflect university students’ engagement with ethical ideas about algorithmic bias, but few addresses how to promote students’ understanding of AI and ethics in K-12 settings.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Toward this end, the existing literature provides little guidance and contains a limited number of studies that focus on supporting K-12 students and teachers’ understanding of social, cultural, and ethical implications of AI [2].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“For example, these analytics can be used to detect university students who are at risk of failing or not completing a course. Through these identifications, instructors can intervene and get students the help they need [55].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Facial recognition systems and predictive analytics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [55] The Institute for Ethical AI in Education. Interim report: towards a shared vision of ethical AI in education. https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-Institute-for-Ethical-AI-in-Educations-Interim-Report-Towards-a-Shared-Vision-of-Ethical-AI-in-Education.pdf. (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“AI dominates the fields of science, engineering, and technology, but also is present in education through machine-learning systems and algorithm productions [43].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [43] Naqvi, A.: Artificial intelligence for audit, forensic accounting, and valuation: a strategic perspective. Wiley (2020) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Students train a cat–dog classifier using two different datasets. While the first dataset reflects the cats as the over-represented group, the second dataset indicates the equal and diverse representation between dogs and cats [2].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“while Google Translate translated the Turkish equivalent of “She/he is a nurse” into the feminine form, it also translated the Turkish equivalent of “She/he is a doctor” into the masculine form [33].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [33] Johnson, M.: A scalable approach to reducing gender bias in Google translate. https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/04/a-scalable-approach-to-reducing-gender.html Accessed 26 March 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The second workshop in the series is “Designing ads with transparency: A creative workshop”. Through this workshop, students are able to think further about the meaning, aim, and impact of advertising and the role of advertisements in our lives [44].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > “AI and Data Privacy” workshop series for K-9 students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [44] Nguyen, S., DiPaola, D.: AI & data privacy activities for k-9 students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/data-privacy-design-for-youth/overview/ (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“England’s A-level and GCSE secondary level examinations were cancelled due to the pandemic in the summer of 2020 [1, 57].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1] Adams, R., McIntyre, N.: England A-level downgrades hit pupils from disadvantaged areas hardest.https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/aug/13/england-a-level-downgrades-hit-pupils-from-disadvantaged-areas-hardest (2020). Accessed 10 September 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [57] Weale, S., Stewart, H.: A-level and GCSE results in England to be based on teacher assessments in U-turn. The Guardian, (2020).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Through a series of lesson plans and hand-on activities, teachers are guided to support students’ learning of the technical terminology of AI systems as well as the ethical and societal implications of AI [2].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it revealed how the score distribution favored students who attended private or independent schools, while students from underrepresented groups were hit hardest.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“people’s agency diminishes as AI systems reduce introspective and independent thought [55].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [55] The Institute for Ethical AI in Education. Interim report: towards a shared vision of ethical AI in education. https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-Institute-for-Ethical-AI-in-Educations-Interim-Report-Towards-a-Shared-Vision-of-Ethical-AI-in-Education.pdf. (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“One of the main learning goals is to introduce students to basic components of AI through algorithms, datasets, and supervised machine-learning systems all while underlining the problem of algorithmic bias [45].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [45] Payne, B. H.: An ethics of artificial intelligence curriculum for middle school students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/ai-ethics-for-middle-school/overview/ (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In this way, students are able to figure out that algorithms can have various motives and goals.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [45] Payne, B. H.: An ethics of artificial intelligence curriculum for middle school students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/ai-ethics-for-middle-school/overview/ (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“students identify different stakeholders (such as their parents, teacher, or doctor) who care about their peanut butter and jelly sandwich algorithm. In this way, the values and opinions of those stakeholders also are embedded in the algorithm.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [45] Payne, B. H.: An ethics of artificial intelligence curriculum for middle school students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/ai-ethics-for-middle-school/overview/ (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Monitoring and tracking students’ online conversations and actions also may limit their participation in the learning event and make them feel unsafe to take ownership for their ideas.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Through algorithms and machine-learning models, AI tracking systems not only necessitate monitoring of activities but also determine the future preferences and actions of their users [47].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [47] Regan, P.M., Jesse, J.: Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics Inf. Technol. 21, 167–179 (2019) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Although existing legislation and standards exist to protect sensitive personal data, AI-based tech companies’ violations with respect to data access and security increase people’s privacy concerns [42, 54].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Murphy, R. F.: Artificial intelligence applications to support k–12 teachers and teaching: a review of promising applications, challenges, and risks. Perspective. 1–20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.7249/PE315 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [54] Stahl, B.C., Wright, D.: Ethics and privacy in ai and big data: implementing responsible research and innovation. IEEE Secur. Priv. 16(3), 26–33 (2018) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Code.org, a nonprofit organization focused on expanding students’ participation in computer science. Sponsored by Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Google, and other tech companies, Code.org aims to provide opportunities for K-12 students to learn about AI and machine-learning systems [20].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > Investigation of “AI for Oceans” by Code.org
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20] Code.org.: AI for Oceans. https://code.org/oceans (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In their AI Bingo chart, students try to identify what prediction the selected AI system makes and what dataset it uses.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [45] Payne, B. H.: An ethics of artificial intelligence curriculum for middle school students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/ai-ethics-for-middle-school/overview/ (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The final workshop in MIT’s AI and data privacy series is “Designing Privacy in Social Media Platforms”. This workshop is designed to teach students about YouTube, design, civics, and data privacy [44].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > “AI and Data Privacy” workshop series for K-9 students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [44] Nguyen, S., DiPaola, D.: AI & data privacy activities for k-9 students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/data-privacy-design-for-youth/overview/ (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The first workshop in the series is “Mystery YouTube Viewer: A lesson on Data Privacy”. During the workshop, students engage with the question of what privacy and data mean [44]. They observe YouTube’s home page from the perspective of a mystery user.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > “AI and Data Privacy” workshop series for K-9 students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [44] Nguyen, S., DiPaola, D.: AI & data privacy activities for k-9 students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/data-privacy-design-for-youth/overview/ (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Different scholars have examined the role of social media in education, describing its impact on student and teacher learning and scholarly communication [6].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Krutka, D., Manca, S., Galvin, S., Greenhow, C., Koehler, M., Askari, E.: Teaching “against” social media: confronting problems of profit in the curriculum. Teachers College Record 121(14), 1–42 (2019) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The activity is provided as an open-access tutorial for teachers to help their students explore how to train, model and classify data, as well as to understand how human bias plays a role in machine-learning systems. During the activity, students first classify the objects as either “fish” or “not fish” in an attempt to remove trash from the ocean.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > Investigation of “AI for Oceans” by Code.org
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20] Code.org.: AI for Oceans. https://code.org/oceans (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Another quality resource from the MIT Media Lab’s Personal Robots Group is a workshop series designed to teach students (between the ages 7 and 14) about data privacy and introduce them to designing and prototyping data privacy features.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > “AI and Data Privacy” workshop series for K-9 students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [44] Nguyen, S., DiPaola, D.: AI & data privacy activities for k-9 students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/data-privacy-design-for-youth/overview/ (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
The ethical and societal drawbacks of AI systems are rarely fully considered in K-12 educational contexts.
“Despite the potential benefits of AI to support students’ learning experiences and teachers’ practices, the ethical and societal drawbacks of these systems are rarely fully considered in K-12 educational contexts.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Students have a wide range of learning styles and needs.
“Students have a wide range of learning styles and needs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Educators will have different ethical concerns and challenges depending on their students' grade and age of development.
“However, it is important to acknowledge that educators will have different ethical concerns and challenges depending on their students’ grade and age of development.”
The paper relies on this without support.
AI monitoring tools collect extensive information about what students and teachers do and prefer.
“Another ethical concern surrounding the use of AI in K-12 education is surveillance or tracking systems which gather detailed information about the actions and preferences of students and teachers.”
The paper relies on this without support.
When public schools mandate AI systems, students and parents effectively cannot opt out, even if they consent to losing privacy.
“They really have no choice if these systems are required by public schools.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Platforms like YouTube serve commonly as instructional tools in K-12 classes and in students' lives outside school.
“social media such as YouTube are widely used as a teaching and learning tool within K-12 classrooms and beyond them, in students’ everyday lives.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Scholarship on preparing K-12 teachers to teach AI and ethics remains at an early stage.
“research on how to develop K-12 teachers’ instructional practices regarding AI and ethics is still in its infancy.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most privacy breaches happen when individuals reveal too much personal data on online platforms.
“Privacy violations mainly occur as people expose an excessive amount of personal information in online platforms.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“AI systems often require access to vast amounts of student data, including academic performance, behavioral patterns, and even personal information (Akgun and Greenhow, 2022; Kamalov et al., 2023).”
From Exploring the effects of artificial intelligence on student and academic well-being in higher education: a mini-review (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun and Greenhow, 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Educational accessibility refers to GenAI's ability to provide learning opportunities to students with limited resources, allowing equitable access to personalized content (Akgun and Greenhow, 2022).”
From Ethical and regulatory challenges of Generative AI in education: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun and Greenhow, 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The personalization of learning is manifested through GenAI's ability to adapt educational content and methods to the specific needs of each student (Akgun and Greenhow, 2022; Alali and Wardat, 2024).”
From Ethical and regulatory challenges of Generative AI in education: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun and Greenhow, 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, the growing use of AI in higher education raises concerns about data privacy and security.”
From Exploring the effects of artificial intelligence on student and academic well-being in higher education: a mini-review (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun and Greenhow, 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These concerns are also central to current discussions on trustworthy artificial intelligence in education, which highlight the importance of ethical awareness, responsible data use, and critical engagement with AI-driven systems in educational contexts (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Luckin et al., 2022).”
From Integrating artificial intelligence into preservice teacher education: enhancing AI literacy and digital material design competency (2026) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“AI-related technologies are frequently associated in the literature with personalization, formative assessment, learning analytics, and instructional support (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022;Hrastinski et al., 2019;Murphy, 2019).”
From Teachers' Experiences with AI in K–12 Education: Opportunities and Challenges (2026) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These reflections echo international discussions on responsible and humancentered AI in education, particularly in contexts involving children and vulnerable learners (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022;Jobin et al., 2019).”
From Teachers' Experiences with AI in K–12 Education: Opportunities and Challenges (2026) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Participants raised concerns regarding data privacy, algorithmic bias, fairness, and inequality, situating AI within broader debates on responsible and human-centered technology use (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022;Jobin et al., 2019;Remian, 2019).”
From Teachers' Experiences with AI in K–12 Education: Opportunities and Challenges (2026) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
In the citing paper
“Challenges such as AI-based misunderstanding, misleadingness, limitations, and hidden ethical issues behind different platforms have been identified (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021;Sijing & Lan, 2018).”
From Teachers’ AI digital competencies and twenty-first century skills in the post-pandemic world (2023) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2021
In the citing paper
“The design of AIED applications could face challenges such as AI-based misunderstanding, misleadingness, limitations, the weak connection to theoretical pedagogical perspectives, and the need for deep exploration of ethical and educational approaches in the application of AIED in education (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021;Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019).”
From A systematic review of literature reviews on artificial intelligence in education (AIED): a roadmap to a future research agenda (2024) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2021
In the citing paper
“GAI systems typically require access to large volumes of student data, including academic records and even personal information (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
From Exploring How AI Literacy and Self-Regulated Learning Relate to Student Writing Performance and Well-Being in Generative AI-Supported Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
In the citing paper
“Educational uses of generative AI pose several other challenges. One is the perpetuation of biases and discrimination, potentially reinforcing racial or gender-based stereotypes during personalized learning, automated scoring, and admission processes (88, 90).”
From The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“A review of AI applications in education identified several use cases that produced higher test scores when students used personalized learning systems (88).”
From The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“In addition, AI products for teaching, often sourced from third parties and guided by cost considerations, may pose unique challenges such as the risk of bias or rapid obsolescence [66,67].”
From Proposing a Principle-Based Approach for Teaching AI Ethics in Medical Education (2024) · cites this paper as [66]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings
“Code.org’s “AI and Oceans” activity.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > Investigation of “AI for Oceans” by Code.org
“the organization offers an activity called “AI for Oceans””
Citations
Cites
Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312032003465 · Cited by 8,057
Culturally responsive teaching: theory, research, and practice
(2011) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-2812 · Cited by 3,113
The Handbook of Artificial Intelligence
Salveter, S. C. (1982) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2013-0-07691-8 · Cited by 1,703
Evolution and Revolution in Artificial Intelligence in Education
Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3 · Cited by 1,229
Foundations of Machine Learning
(2012) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/8291.003.0006 · Cited by 1,151
Foundations of Machine Learning
Mohri, M., Rostamizadeh, A., & Talwalkar, A. (2018) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/10290.001.0001 · Cited by 1,122
(2019) · Open Research Online (The Open University) · Cited by 1,004
Chatbots for learning: A review of educational chatbots for the Facebook Messenger
Smutny, P., & Schreiberova, P. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103862 · Cited by 770
Artificial Intelligence and the ‘Good Society’: the US, EU, and UK approach
Cath, C., Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2017) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9901-7 · Cited by 733 · cited 1×
“For example, the European Union (EU) has highlighted ethical concerns and implications of AI, emphasized privacy protection, surveillance, and nondiscrimination as primary areas of interest, and provided guidelines on how trustworthy AI should be [3, 15, 23].”
BackgroundEmerging challenges in AI and the need for AI ethics education
Borenstein, J., & Howard, A. (2021) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-020-00002-7 · Cited by 626
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
- Citron, D.K., Pasquale, F.A.: The scored society: due process for automated predictions. Wash. Law Rev. 89, 1–33 (2014)
- IEEE Corporate Advisory Group (CAG): IEEE guide for terms and concepts in intelligent process automation. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standards Association. 1–16 (2017). https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel7/8070669/8070670/08070671.pdf
- Miller, F.A., Katz, J.H., Gans, R.: The OD imperative to add inclusion to the algorithms of artificial intelligence. OD Practitioner. 5(1), 6–12 (2018)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,101–1,200 of 1,448
Personalized Professional Growth
Agrawal, A., Londhe, D. R., Rajgude, K. V., Avachat, V., Tripathi, M. K., Gupta, B., & Gupta, D. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-4129-3.ch008
Theoretical Principles Underpinning Game-Based and Immersive Learning
Ghosh, O., & Kumar, B. (2025) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-4465-2.ch001
REINVENTING CURRICULUM THROUGH AI-BASED VISUAL FEEDBACK
Sarna, S., Dahiya, R., Sharma, D., Jayapaul, A., Jain, R., Munjal, K., & Chavan, G. (2025) · ShodhKosh Journal of Visual and Performing Arts · doi:10.29121/shodhkosh.v6.i3s.2025.6759
Şahin, İ., & Açıkgöz, B. (2025) · Akademik Yaklaşımlar Dergisi · doi:10.54688/ayd.1765350
Artificial Intelligence in Education
Tonbuloğlu, B. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-8857-1.ch004
Counterfactuals and artificial intelligence explicability problem
Ostojić, J. (2025) · Reci Beograd · doi:10.5937/reci2518080o
Tee Hui, T. E. O., & Chow, Z. J. (2025) · IEEE International Symposium on Embedded Multicore/Many-core Systems-on-Chip (MCSoC) · doi:10.1109/mcsoc67473.2025.00026
Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the AI-TPACK Scale
Batuk, B., Türk, N., Türkan, A., & YILDIRIM, O. (2026) · Journal of Family Counseling and Education · doi:10.32568/jfce.1832424
Best Practice in the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education Institutions
Javier, Q. C. Y., Alejandra, B. P. M., Ismari, G., et al. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-09074-4_6
Ethical Challenges in the Use of AI in the Context of Initial Teacher Training
Patrício, M. R., Gonçalves, B. F., & Mesquita, E. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-10731-2_9
Chatbots in Schools: Opportunities and Considerations
Maher, D. (2025) · Digital education and learning · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-03977-4_12 · Cited by 1
Asmar, K., Jai, Y. E., & Eljai, M. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-07785-1_54
Preservice Teachers' Attitudes toward Artificial Intelligence: A Scale Development Study
Calp, R., Mukba, G., & Şata, M. (2025) · Üniversite Araştırmaları Dergisi · doi:10.32329/uad.1740270 · Cited by 1
AI in Healthcare and Education
Graham-Perel, A. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-12402-9_1
Almalahmeh, M. S. I. (2026) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-95310-1_9
Análisis del tratamiento informativo sobre drogas en el diario Tumbes21
Feijoó, Ó. C. L. R., Gamboa, A. L. B., Farfán, K. V. M., & Farias, W. B. (2025) · Revista Punto Cero · doi:10.35319/puntocero.202551419
ChatGPT in Political Education
Song, H. (2025) · Education as Change · doi:10.25159/1947-9417/19336
“For instance, Akgun and Greenhow (2022) note that using AI in education could strengthen systemic biases and discrimination, further increasing inequality among historically marginalised student groups.”
Linos, P. K., & Chenoweth, S. (2025) · 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) · doi:10.1109/fie63693.2025.11328128
Multitask Generative Dialogue and Emotion Classification with Indonesian Empathetic Dialogue Dataset
Erfina, A., Oanh, T. T., & Phuong, L.-H. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Computing, Engineering and Design (ICCED) · doi:10.1109/icced68324.2025.11324491
“The challenge is how AI can coexist with humans and understand what they feel [1].”
AI-Supported Assessment of Children's Scientific Process Skills in Exploring Liquid Buoyancy
Gözüm, A. İ. C., & Doymaz, C. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-9074-1.ch003
WIP: Structured AI Tutoring in Engineering Education
Cruz, A., Yatawara, A., Misha, M., & Wang, J. (2025) · IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) · doi:10.1109/fie63693.2025.11328293
“We are not the first to explore AI integration in the classroom [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].”
Li, H., & Hamid, A. H. B. A. (2026) · Journal of Multiscale Modelling · doi:10.1142/s1756973726400226
Bae, H., Park, J., Zhao, Y., & Walton, D. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-0756-5.ch003
Bridging the Digital Divide With AI
Al-Zahrani, A. M. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-0756-5.ch006
INTELIGÊNCIA ARTIFICIAL GENERATIVA NA EDUCAÇÃO BÁSICA
Nascimento, A. K. D. O., Castro, V., Zheldibayeva, R., & Cope, B. (2025) · Revista de Estudos de Cultura · doi:10.32748/revec.v11i27.22720 · Cited by 2
Trajbarič, T., Svenšek, A., Štiglic, G., & Gosak, L. (2026) · doi:10.2196/preprints.91571
A professional intervention to improve the AI skills of high school teachers through comics
Lazarinis, F. (2026) · International Journal of Professional Development Learners and Learning · doi:10.30935/ijpdll/17776
“Yet, many teachers currently exhibit limited familiarity with the fundamental concepts, ethical implications, and practical applications of AI, highlighting the need for targeted professional development initiatives (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Ng et al., 2021).”
Assessing the Adoption of Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education
Hung, N. N., Pham, N. S., My, N. T., Anh, N. T. M., Anh, T. V., & Minh, N. T. (2026) · International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET) · doi:10.3991/ijet.v21i01.59557 · Cited by 2
ZWISCHEN THEORIE UND PRAXIS: KÜNSTLICHE INTELLIGENZ IM DAF-UNTERRICHT AUF DEM PRÜFSTAND
TUĞLU, Y., & Pekdemir, P. (2026) · Filologičeski rakursi · doi:10.46687/ypvu1787
AI and the Reconfiguration of Professional Identity
Kızıl, V. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-7416-1.ch002
Interrogating the Roles of Artificial Intelligence in Childhood Education
Zhang, C., Margulieux, L. E., & Quinn, M. F. (2026) · Journal of Research in Childhood Education · doi:10.1080/02568543.2025.2584946
Evaluation of Learning in AI Integration Training for Learning Assessment Among MTs Teachers
Pradana, H. D., & Sumarno, A. (2025) · Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA · doi:10.29303/jppipa.v11i7.11595
“However, challenges persist, including ethical concerns, data privacy issues, and technological readiness (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021; González-Calatayud et al., 2021).”
Wang, J., Sang, G., Wang, K., Hu, H., & Ruan, Q. (2026) · Journal for the Study of Education and Development Infancia y Aprendizaje · doi:10.1177/02103702251408953 · Cited by 1
“In K-12 education, dashboards, chatbots, automated assessment systems and intelligent tutoring systems are among the most readily available AI-based technologies (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Celik et al., 2022; Chen et al., 2022).”
Mensah, E. G., Amutenya, T., Nyamekye, E., Ampem, I. O., & Sarfo, F. O. (2026) · Discover Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s44163-025-00805-9 · Cited by 1
“The ethical challenges and dilemmas in using AI in education must be introduced to students to help them navigate these complexities responsibly [4].”
Human-AI collaboration in vocational writing: Building a framework for adaptive English learning
Çiçek, Ş. T., & Can, D. T. (2026) · Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning · doi:10.31681/jetol.1821890
The transformative power of artificial intelligence in science education: a pedagogical perspective
Iheoma, N. P., & Udourioh, G. (2026) · Science education quarterly. · doi:10.55056/seq.1013 · Cited by 5
Kapoor, S. K., Sankhla, K., & Syed, S. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-4982-4.ch002
Responsibility of Parents and Schools: Education in the Age of AI
Kötting, D. (2026) · Studies in computational intelligence · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-02260-8_6 · Cited by 1
Omotubora, A., Sennaike, O. A., Odumuyiwa, V., Yinka-Banjo, C., Igweogu, M., Okpongkpong, E., Iyoha-Osagie, T., & Rufai, A. (2026) · AI & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-026-02870-9
“An apparent consequence of systems built from such a one-sided perspective is the potential to undermine inclusivity and perpetuate societal biases and stereotypes (Akgun and Greenhow 2005).”
Alhazmi, A. M. S., Alruwaili, E. M. A., Alruwaili, L. M. A., Alshammari, N. F. K., Albalawi, M. F., Alruwaili, M. M. H., Alruwaili, F. W. D., Alshammari, S. M. A., Alshammari, F. F. B., Alshammari, A. H. M., et al. (2024) · International Journal of Computational and Experimental Science and Engineering · doi:10.22399/ijcesen.4886
“Their focus on data standards, integrity, and utility makes them pivotal in transforming raw clinical documentation into reliable, high-quality data assets [15].”
Leveraging AI for Personalized Learning: An Optimization-Based Approach
Kumar, P. K., Babu, J. S., Yarabolu, S. N., Sriharsha, A. V., Kumar, M. S., Ganesh, D., & Nirmala, K. (2026) · Lecture notes in electrical engineering · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-5831-5_26
Song, W., & Wu, W. (2025) · International Conference on Educational Technology (ICET) · doi:10.1109/icet67421.2025.11380640
“Akgun categorizes ethical concerns into privacy, bias, autonomy, and surveillance [22].”
Kuncoro, K. S., Fitriasari, P., Erlangga, S. Y., Ario, M., & Kartika, D. L. (2026) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.176098.1 · Cited by 1
The Sociotechnical Imaginaries of AI in Future School Punishment
Wei, Z. (2025) · International Conference on Educational Technology (ICET) · doi:10.1109/icet67421.2025.11380696
“…security issues are at the forefront, and parents need to ensure that their children’s sensitive information is fully protected. b) In addition , the lack of transparency in algorithms may lead to trust issues - how can parents be confident that the system's judgments are fair and reasonable[8]?”
Sun, Q., & Qu, P. (2026) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/21582440251412777
“They personalized learning and optimizing assessments (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Limo et al., 2023) by catering to the unique traits and needs of individual learners (Hwang et al., 2020; Jin, Sun et al., 2025), monitoring students’ progress (Wang & Zhao, 2020), and providing precise evaluations…”
AI-ASSISTED NOTATION SYSTEMS IN MUSIC PEDAGOGY
Panigra, A., Korwar, G., Chauhan, R. P. S., et al. (2026) · ShodhKosh Journal of Visual and Performing Arts · doi:10.29121/shodhkosh.v7.i1s.2026.7109
Empowering EFL Writers Through AI
Rosmayanti, V. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-5601-3.ch009
Left Behind in the Age of AI? Potential Career Challenges for Criminal Justice Students at a HBCU
Huynh, C., Maye, C., Duncan, P., Ralph, A. M., & Cox, L. (2026) · Journal of Criminal Justice Education · doi:10.1080/10511253.2026.2633201
Shimray, S. R., Kaba, A., & Gautam, S. (2025) · International Conference on Social Networks Analysis, Management and Security (SNAMS) · doi:10.1109/snams67467.2025.11391066
“Chatbots are a programmed conversational means that leverage natural language processing and machine learning algorithms to interact with users (7).”
AlKhaza’leh, M. S., Alkhalaileh, M. S., & Zaitoun, E. A. (2025) · International Conference on Intelligent Digitization of Systems and Services (IDSS) · doi:10.1109/idss67199.2025.11398282
“In contrast, Al-Nuaimi's study [21] addressed the ethical challenges associated with the use of AI and did not focus on gender differences, but emphasised the importance of ensuring inclusivity and fairness in the use of these tools, which calls for equal access between males and females.”
Chu, R., Foong, L. M., & Lim, S. C. J. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) · doi:10.1109/iceed66794.2025.11400197
“Data privacy protection is one of the core issues, and several publications point out that AI tools rely on large amounts of personal data (e.g., student performance, behavioral records), but inadequate anonymization and encryption measures can lead to data leakage or abuse [1] [2].”
InfluentialPerceptions of AI-Driven EdTech: Nationwide Survey and Focus Group Insights from Key End Users
Min, A., Dickerson, K. L., Park, S., Dotch, E., Han, A., Rubin, J. D., Lombard, E. J., Chen, K., Divanji, R. A., Odgers, C. L., et al. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3798278 · Cited by 2
“Additionally, there are growing questions about the technology’s trustworthiness and reliability in meeting user expectations [2, 66].”
Trust in Artificial Intelligence and Its Acceptance in Croatian Society
Bara, M., Dorotić, J., & Ćosić, T. (2026) · Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems · doi:10.7906/indecs.24.1.4
“…a range of advantages in terms of efficiency, service personalization, task automation, analytics, and time savings, its widespread adoption also raises concerns regarding fears of job displacement, diminished privacy, as well as ethical dilemmas and inequalities in access to technology 1-5 .”
Santos, J. L. B., de Souza, G. M., Lobo, A. K. D. A., et al. (2026) · Cuadernos de Educación y Desarrollo · doi:10.55905/cuadv18n2-038
Training K–12 Teachers for AI Integration
Suárez, L. M. C., GUTIÉRREZ-JIMÉNEZ, B., & Domínguez, N. P. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-0101-1.ch013
Formaneck, S. D. (2026) · The International Journal of Management Education · doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2026.101519
ahmad, N., & Ismael, E. (2026) · Polytechnic Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences · doi:10.25156/ptjhss.v6n1y2025.pp140-157
Personalization, Equity, and Ethics
Shafik, W. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-2637-5.ch002
Uzun, A., SEVİM, O., & Sevim, S. A. (2026) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2026.2625390 · Cited by 3
“…choice, and sentence structure (Marzuki et al., 2023; Yan, 2023); as a text modeler suggesting alternative expressions for content and organization (Su et al., 2023); and as a reflective comparison tool supporting learner autonomy and self-assessment (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Nazari et al., 2021).”
Human Collaboration in the Age of AI
ElSayary, A., & Ragab, K. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-0328-2.ch002
Balyer, A. (2026) · Journal of Business Innovation and Governance · doi:10.54472/jobig.1816619
Chang, L. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8998934/v1 · Cited by 1
Data-Informed, Not Data-Driven
Ragab, K. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-4908-4.ch011
AI Policy in the Gulf and Middle East
ElSayary, A. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-4908-4.ch006
Harnessing the Affordances of Artificial Intelligence to Foster Deep Learning
Ramaila, S. M. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/404026
Rasheed, Q. U. A. (2026) · Leadership and Policy in Schools · doi:10.1080/15700763.2026.2640592 · Cited by 3
Theory of mind and continual reinforcement learning for bullying intervention
Zhinín-Vera, L., González-García, J. J., López‐Jaquero, V., et al. (2026) · Neural Computing and Applications · doi:10.1007/s00521-025-11835-w
Li, M., Binbin, Z., Li, G., Tao, W., Harun, M. T., Li, J., & Fu, J. (2026) · Physical Education Theory and Methodology · doi:10.17309/tmfv.2026.2.03 · Cited by 1
Cheng, Z., Thewissen, J., Bi, M., & Zhu, C. (2026) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703297.2026.2644340 · Cited by 2
Kaba, A., Shimray, S. R., Zaitoun, E. A., & Refae, G. A. E. (2026) · Open Information Science · doi:10.1515/opis-2025-0038
Karagiorgou, C.-E., Koukis, N., Koundourou, C., & Tzovla, E. (2026) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/18149 · Cited by 2
AI-Enhanced Digital Storytelling: Integrating Math and Humanities with Scratch
Konstantinidis, I., Pataka, A., & Stasinopoulos, G. (2025) · European Journal of Engineering and Technology Research · doi:10.24018/ejeng.2025.1.cie.70017
Ibrahim, K., Osuizugbo, I. C., Dandajeh, M. A., Omer, M. M., Oshodi, O. S., & Ezeudu, B. O. (2026) · Journal of structural design and construction practice. · doi:10.1061/jsdccc.sceng-1969 · Cited by 1
Bibliometric Assessment of Experiential Learning's Impact on ESG-Oriented Professional Development
Dhanabagiyam, S., Balaji, V., & Nandi, S. (2026) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-4475-1.ch006
Adelhardt, Z., & Eberle, T. (2026) · Lecture notes on data engineering and communications technologies · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-4423-3_39
Connected Learning, Disconnected Minds
Radhwan, M. G. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-4222-1.ch002
Educator Training for Artificial Intelligence Use in AI-Based K-12 Education System
Hossain, S. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-6346-1.ch006
Including AI in K-12 Education
Mallik, T. R., Nova, Z. T., Anjum, H., & Saroar, M. B. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-6346-1.ch010
Designing a Teacher Training Program of AI Literacy for K–12 Educators
Lal, R., & Aarzoo (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-6346-1.ch005
Timovski, R. (2025) · Journal of Educational Sciences Theory and Practice · doi:10.46763/jespt2520210t
Elgen, A. K., Dodou, K., & Brevik, L. M. (2026) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2026.105517
“Artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly integrated into all areas of society, and researchers in many fields, including education, have emphasized the importance of its responsible use (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Albadarin et al., 2024; Hockley, 2025).”
Future Concepts of Artificial Intelligence
ŞAHİN, H. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/406016
Tolochko, S. V. (2026) · Scientific Herald of Sivershchyna Series Education Social and Behavioural Sciences · doi:10.32755/sjeducation.2026.01.297
Schwarte, Y., & Gao, Y. (2026) · Journal of International Education in Business · doi:10.1108/jieb-08-2024-0098 · Cited by 1
Miron, J., & Kenth, N. (2026) · Journal of innovation in polytechnic education. · doi:10.69520/jipe.v8i2.295
Hameed, H. Y., & Khudhair, B. W. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-15784-3_40
Application of Artificial Intelligence in Personalized Education
Assmar, Y. D., Contreras-Masse, R., Dozal, M. V. H., Andrade, I. O. H., & González, L. F. A. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-17930-2_10 · Cited by 1
Teachers’ Perceptions of Students’ Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI): A literature Review
Sumilac, M., Suerte, M., & Judicpa, J. M. (2026) · JPAIR Institutional Research · doi:10.7719/irj.v26i1.1004
Avan, Ş. K., Avan, Ç., & Kalenderoğlu, İ. (2026) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2026.2649550
“However, ethical, pedagogical and psychosocial dimensions of using AI in the teacher education process should also be considered (Adams et al., 2023; Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
Zhang, J., Li, Z., Wu, Y., & Huang, Y. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-8420-8_33
Goglin, C. (2026) · RIMHE Revue Interdisciplinaire Management Homme(s) & Entreprise · doi:10.3917/rimhe.061.0079
Perspectives of teachers on integrating AI tools in science education
Karousiou, C., & Evagorou, M. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1738401
Adapting to the Future of Work
Amah, O. E., & Okesipe, V. O. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/406741
Ethical Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Education
Singhal, R., Srivastava, S., & Chandan, H. C. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-8027-8.ch012
Chen, W., Kou, W., & Zhang, Y. (2026) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3772363.3798897
Open Auditorium—A human-centric extended reality blended learning tool
Isop, W. A. (2026) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2026.1698599
Ethical boundaries in the use of ChatGPT in education: Evidence from sports sciences students
Ceylan, G. (2026) · Education science and sports. · doi:10.70053/esas.1880596 · Cited by 1
Faizal, M. S. B. M., & Osman, K. (2026) · International Journal of Modern Education · doi:10.35631/ijmoe.829041
Reimagining Education With Artificial Intelligence
Duran, V., & Çelık, F. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/407417
Metadata
- Authors
- Akgun, S., & Greenhow, C.
- Affiliations
- Michigan State University (US)
- Venue
- AI and Ethics
- Published
- 2021-09-22
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 431-440
- ISSN
- 2730-5953 (ISSN-L)
- 2730-5961
- PMC
- PMC8455229
- OpenAlex
- W3199189488
- Cited by
- 1,473
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 433 · 2025: 517 · 2024: 393 · 2023: 109 · 2022: 21
- FWCI
- 19.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- AI and Ethics (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- michigan state university, college of education (Summer Research Fellowship)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence in education, AI ethics, K-12 education, personalized learning, automated assessment, AI literacy, Code.org, MIT Media Lab, ethical dilemmas of AI
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
